Trade Finance Operations

Trade finance is the lifeblood of global #commerce and yet it is still largely based on decades-old, paper-based processes. Modernizing it is a colossal opportunity. Let’s take a look. #Tradefinance is essentially the financing of international trade flows and includes tools, techniques, and financial instruments to facilitate international trade by mitigating some of its inherent risks: 1) payment 2) delivery of goods and services. Some numbers: -   Studies converge that the global international #trade market is between $10 and $15 trillion (between 9.5% and 14.2% of global GDP) -   Around 80% of global trade uses trade finance (source: WTO) -   The global trade financing gap – which is the unmet demand from businesses that cannot facilitate imports and exports – exceeds $2 trillion    To understand the extent to which Trade Finance has not managed to modernize in decades (source: ICC): -   Trade parties, from importers and exporters to banks, customs and logistics institutions collectively create a huge amount of data -   Letters of Credit are the most complex: the end-to-end journey involves more than 20 players and more than 100 pages across 10 to 20 documents -   The interactions between these players and documents produce about 5,000 data field interactions The inefficiencies are unimaginable (source: ICC): -   Most of these interactions are duplicates of existing data and are not scrutinized or are sometimes ignored -   The share of this redundant data rises during the trade journey. In total only about 1% of data field interactions add value. Globally this is an estimated 200 billion data field interactions supporting trade finance All these translate into a huge potential to modernize, to digitize, to make use of #technology and to become more efficient. Some estimates: -   BCG estimates an integrated digital solution would save global trade banks between US$2.5 billion and US$6.0 billion on a cost base of US$12 billion to US$16 billion, with the potential to increase revenue by 20% -   A different ICC report commissioned for the G7 estimated that digitising the trade ecosystem could increase trade across the G7 by nearly $9 trillion or nearly 43% and create as much as $6 trillion in extra exports -   McKinsey estimates that adopting an electronic bill of lading could save $6.5 bn in direct costs and enable between $30 billion and $40 billion in new global trade volume These are some of the technologies to lead the disruption: -   Blockchain -   Artificial Intelligence -   Data Analytics -   Internet of Things -   Cloud infrastructure -   Smart contracts -   Modern banking and payments platforms The system is so complex and with so many stakeholders that change will be slow. However, simple wins based on interoperability, digitization and standardization could be the low-hanging fruits to start with. Opinions: my own, Graphic source & data insights: ICC 2018 global survey on trade finance

I just published something I'm genuinely proud of. Collaborate to Navigate: Driving Payment Innovation Across Borders – Asia Pacific 2025, authored in partnership with HSBC Corporate and Institutional Banking and the Emerging Payments Association Asia. This represents months of work synthesizing insights from closed-door roundtables across Mumbai, Singapore, and Hong Kong—with 50+ senior leaders from banks, fintechs, platforms, PSPs, and regulators. Here's what I discovered: Asia's digital economy operates in real time. The infrastructure moving money across borders does not. Platforms scale globally from day one. SMEs export services at unprecedented speed. Consumers expect seamlessness regardless of geography. Yet cross-border payments remain constrained by documentation friction, fragmented compliance interpretations, siloed fraud intelligence, and legacy rails built for an earlier era. The gap isn't getting smaller. It's getting wider. Five defining tensions emerged across all three markets: 1/ Real-time expectations vs. real-world constraints 2/ Regulation as both catalyst and constraint 3/ Platform-led models reshaping money movement 4/ Fraud outpacing institutional defenses 5/ Interoperability as the foundation for progress As Nicholas Soo, Regional Head of Payment Products at HSBC, framed it: "Technology makes payment innovation possible, but collaboration makes it a reality." And as Camilla Bullock, CEO of Emerging Payments Association Asia, emphasized: "Trust, compliance and customer protection will determine whether innovation can scale." What struck me most: We're not short of innovation. We're short of coordination. One line came up in three different cities: "Fraudsters collaborate better than we do." Technology can move money instantly. But without shared fraud intelligence, digital-first compliance, default transparency, and interoperable rails, speed just creates new vulnerabilities. HSBC and EPAA have created something powerful here—a genuine industry dialogue on neutral ground. Full report and video series: Link in comments. This doesn't just house the report; it includes video perspectives from participants and creates space for ongoing conversation. I've watched this pattern across my 24 years in payments: infrastructure beats innovation. Established rails absorb new technology rather than get replaced. But what's different now is the SPEED of convergence and the SCALE of fragmentation. The next 2-3 years will define whether Asia builds cross-border payment systems that match the digital economy's pace—or whether the friction compounds until something breaks. If you had to choose the one tension that will define competitive advantage in cross-border payments by 2027, which would it be? A) Speed vs Safety B) Global Platforms vs Local Regulation C) Innovation vs Operational Risk D) New Rails vs Legacy Infrastructure What am I missing? What are you seeing in your market?

The architecture of cross-border payments is shifting — and it’s no longer just about speed. It’s about programmability, transparency, and compliance by design. Circle newly launched Payments Network (CPN) is not a minor enhancement to legacy systems — it’s a fundamentally different model. One where regulated stablecoins (USDC, EURC) act as digital cash, settlement is near-instant, and participants are governed by enforceable standards. How does CPN stand apart? • Value transfer, not just message exchange • Settlement finality in seconds, not days • No reliance on correspondent banking chains • Full transparency with on-chain audit trails • Compliance-embedded — KYC, AML, cybersecurity built into the network design It’s a network where every transaction is verifiable, programmable, and borderless — opening new possibilities for real-time treasury, trade, and payments innovation. As someone deeply engaged with ISO 20022, structured data, and the future of regulated payments infrastructure — this evolution is both timely and necessary. The question isn’t whether these networks will coexist. It’s whether traditional rails will keep pace with programmable money. Biju Nicolas Pinto Sam Boboev #payments #financialservices #swift #stablecoins #cbdc #treasury #iso20022 #blockchain

Cost, Speed, Coverage: The Cross-Border Payments Trade-Off 💡 All Cross-Border Payment systems must solve the core problem that a sender and recipient, as well as their respective banks, may not be directly connected. The solutions to this problem create trade-offs in speed, cost, and coverage of supported countries/currencies 🌍 Correspondent banking and money transmitters were pioneered in the pre-digital era, so their models use networks of intermediaries in different ways to solve the same problem. They generally optimize for coverage at the expense of speed/cost. Payment aggregators and stablecoins use technology (e.g., better onboarding and servicing via mobile apps, faster/cheaper pay in/out via emerging RTP rails) to reduce or eliminate intermediaries. Interestingly, some new players offer embedded models, either as a pure play (e.g., Airwallex, Nium, Bridge) or as a complement to their existing direct business (e.g., Wise Platform) 👨💻 Beyond the mechanics of how money moves across borders, it’s important to understand how factors like sender/recipient and country/currency mix determine the strategy and economics of Cross-Border Payment companies. The sender/recipient mix (C2C, B2C, C2B, B2B) determines distribution strategy, regulatory and compliance burden, product adjacencies, etc. Because businesses generally send and receive more payments more frequently than consumers, they have more pricing leverage and see lower take rates than mixes involving consumers. For example, Remitly (C2C) has a gross take rate of >200 bps versus Corpay (B2B)’s <60 bps 💰 The corridor is another important determinant of take rate. Generally corridors with larger volumes, more stable currencies, more balanced flows, modern banking infrastructures, and complementary regulatory regimes are more competitive and therefore have lower take rates. Inversely, there’s typically less competition and higher take rates with more volatile currencies, unbalanced and low/inconsistent flows, and antiquated financial infra. The take rate is up to 25x greater for the least competitive corridors. Many Cross-Border Payment companies follow the general fintech trend of complementing low-margin transactional revenue with other complementary financial products and/or higher-margin software products. For example, Wise offers interest-bearing deposit accounts while Flywire offers vertical software for its key industries, like education and healthcare. Embedding for distribution is another popular strategy, with companies that were initially direct-to-consumer offering products like Wise’s Platform and Airwallex’s embedded solution. Source: Matt Brown - https://t.ly/yHb9m #Innovation #Fintech #Banking #EmbeddedFinance #OpenBanking #API #FinancialServices #Payments #CrossBorder #FX #Stablecoins 

Commodity traders are no longer just financing flows, they are taking control of the assets. From a trade finance perspective, Mercuria’s move into equity (e.g. a 25% stake in an Indonesian aluminium smelter) signals a clear evolution: the traditional prepayment and offtake model is no longer sufficient to secure long-term access to strategic metals. As balance sheets expand and competition for copper and aluminium intensifies, we are seeing a structural shift toward hybrid models, combining structured finance, long-term offtake, and now direct ownership. For banks, this raises important questions: • How do we adapt risk frameworks to clients becoming asset owners? • Where do we position ourselves between financing flows vs. financing assets? • How do we stay relevant as traders internalise more of the value chain? In a tighter, more volatile market, control over supply is becoming as critical as access to liquidity. #Commodities #TradeFinance #StructuredFinance #Metals #Mining #EnergyTransition #Aluminium #Copper #RiskManagement #Mercuria https://lnkd.in/dTuagVN5

Watching the EPI and their pan‑European instant payment system Wero gradually gain momentum from afar has been very interesting.👇 Over the past few months, the EPI has welcomed several new members onto its platform, including a whole host of banks and payment providers in Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. This growth means that Wero now counts around 40 million registered users across all of these core markets. 💡 Core Features of Wero: ➡️ Peer‑to‑peer transfers (P2P): Send or request money using phone numbers or QR codes; payment requests can expire after 30 days. ➡️ Bank app integration: It may be accessed via participating banks’ apps or the standalone Wero app. ➡️ E‑commerce rollout: Wero has extended to online merchant payments. ➡️ POS payments, BNPL, subscriptions, loyalty and digital identity solutions are all planned. 💡 Why Does Wero Matter? ➡️ It aims to unify disparate national payment systems, replacing services like Giropay (Germany), Paylib (France), Payconiq (Belgium), and iDEAL (Netherlands). ➡️ It represents a push towards European payment sovereignty, reducing reliance on U.S. providers such as Visa, Mastercard, and PayPal. ➡️ Adoption is growing and fast. 💡 Potential Cross-Border Challenges Ahead While the incremental expansion builds reliability and trust, operating across multiple European jurisdictions brings unique challenges: ➡️ Regulatory Debt. Differences in KYC, AML, and digital payments regulations across countries demand tailored compliance strategies. ➡️ Technical Fragmentation. Harmonising infrastructure (e.g., SEPA‑inst, TIPS) and ensuring seamless 10‑second A2A transfers across banks and countries is a complex feat. ➡️ User & Merchant Adoption. Beyond early adopters, widespread usage needs trusted experiences, interoperability with existing systems, and clear incentives. ➡️ Local Bank Integration. Each bank's tech stack and customer base differ, rolling out Wero demands bespoke app updates, training, and branding integration. ➡️ Competition & Scale. Wero competes not only with entrenched players like Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, but also with national systems and emerging digital wallets. EPI must scale fast enough to stay relevant. ➡️ Interoperability Partnerships. Collaborations, like with EuroPA, are promising, but complex. Aligning timelines, tech standards, and governance is no small task. Wero’s carefully orchestrated rollout reflects EPI’s deliberate strategy, build a solid base, demonstrate reliability, then scale across borders. Each new member marks another step towards a common European solution. The vision is a trusted and interoperable system that works seamlessly across borders. Wero is not racing ahead, but building patiently, and perhaps that is what will give it staying power.

Arguably the most significant obstacle to a regional cross-border payments network in Southeast Asia has been the difference in regulations and payment practices among the different countries. Unlike the European Union, which has a central bank that determines monetary policy for all of the member states, Southeast Asia has no unifying financial institution. We will be interested to see if the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and the founding members of Project Nexus can overcome this challenge. The initiative has set out to link the real-time payment systems of India, Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore, and the Philippines by 2026. Indonesia will be an observer in the project – though it is hard to envision a regional cross-border payments network that does not formally include Southeast Asia’s largest economy. To facilitate live implementation, the partner central banks and instant payment system (IPS) operators have agreed to work towards establishing a new entity, the Nexus Scheme Organization (NSO), which will manage the project. The NSO will be wholly owned by the central banks and/or IPS operators in participating countries. As for the BIS, the organization said in a July 1 statement, “In developing the blueprint in phase three of Nexus, the BIS has fulfilled its role of supporting central banks in finding innovative solutions to deliver public goods.” While the BIS will not own or operate the NSO, it will continue its support by playing a technical advisory role before Nexus goes live. It will also facilitate cooperation among members and the entry of new participants. Compared to the cross-border CBDC project mBridge that the BIS has been overseeing, we reckon Nexus may fare better. While CBDCs still often look like a solution in search of a problem, central bankers in Southeast Asia have long sought a regional real-time cross-border payments network to lower transaction costs as well as increase transparency and efficiency. India, meanwhile, has been actively seeking out a larger international role for its UPI payments rail, and Project Nexus offers a clear opportunity to deepen UPI’s global footprint. #bis #projectnexus #payments #crossborderpayments #fintech https://hubs.li/Q02Gv2Cj0

Project Nexus: Enabling instant #crossborder #payments leveraging the growing Instant Payment Systems across the World Cross-border payments are often slow, offering a frustrating user experience and imposing significant costs on individuals and businesses. In contrast, in over 60 countries today domestic payments reach their destination in seconds at near zero cost to the sender or recipient. This is thanks to the growing availability of #instantpaymentsystems (IPS). Cross-border payments could be significantly improved by linking up domestic IPS in multiple countries. In April 2021, Singapore 🇸🇬 and Thailand 🇹🇭 connected their IPS, allowing customers of participating financial institutions to send payments across the border using just the recipient’s phone number. This was followed in February 2023 by an IPS link between Singapore 🇸🇬 and India 🇮🇳 . Several initiatives in the Southeast Asian region and globally aim to do the same, through #bilateral links. However, connecting countries one-to-one soon becomes complex, since every IPS has different technical standards, business processes and #regulatory requirements. Each new #bilateral initiative requires a complex technical integration and multi-party legal negotiation. Nexus addresses these challenges by making it easier to interlink multiple instant payment systems on a #distributednetwork through a standardised and multilateral approach. Each IPS would need to invest time and resources to be able to connect to and communicate with Nexus, but this would be a one-time effort rather than being repeated every time they connect to a new country. The Nexus proof of concept demonstrates that connecting #IPS multilaterally is #technically feasible and could have significant potential benefits for individuals and businesses across the world. The project had to tackle a number of challenges. There are wide differences between the design of different IPS and their #proxy schemes, and it is not realistic to expect the industry to move to a single standardised design. Instead, it is important to find ways to accommodate those differences, both through tools that support technical interoperability, such as the #ISO20022 standard for message formats and APIs, as well as through methods to promote business interoperability, such as a cross-border scheme that gives IPS a clear #rulebook for their interactions with other IPS. One of the most challenging frictions in (instant) cross-border payments is sanctions screening. There is often a conflict (real or perceived) between the requirement to screen payers and payees using high-quality verified data, and the restrictions that data protection rules place on sharing these data. Nexus proposes a number of methods to improve this data sharing, so reducing the amount of manual processing. Read on to learn more about #ProjectNexus and what the next phase will entail Bank for International Settlements – BIS

Cross-border payments are often blamed on regulation. That explanation is incomplete. In this video, I break down Circle’s Payment Network (CPN) and explain why the real bottleneck in global payments is architecture, not compliance. Circle is not building a consumer wallet or a remittance app. CPN is a permissioned network for regulated financial institutions to settle with each other directly using USDC as the settlement rail. We cover: - Why correspondent banking is slow by design - How Circle’s Payment Network removes NOSTRO accounts and intermediaries - How FX quoting, compliance, and settlement work step by step - Why USDC acts as infrastructure, not a product - What this means for banks, fintechs, and cross-border payments at scale This is not about crypto speculation. It is about how stablecoins are quietly becoming financial plumbing for global money movement. If you are building in payments, banking, crypto infrastructure, or embedded finance, this breakdown will help you understand where cross-border payments are heading. 📌 Full deep dive article linked below #fintech #crypto #banking

𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐲 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚’𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬-𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐚𝐲𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 — 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐚𝐩-𝐭𝐨-𝐩𝐚𝐲. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭, 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Over a decade ago, I had the privilege of leading Apple Pay’s launch for Apple and Visa in the UK, helping design the early architecture of tokenisation and biometric authentication that went on to redefine how the world transacts. Back then, paying with a fingerprint felt almost futuristic - a leap of faith where trust met technology. Today, that very architecture — refined through regulation, strengthened by innovation, and validated by global adoption - has reached India’s cross-border payments ecosystem. And Apple’s move isn’t just another product integration; it’s a strategic recalibration — quiet, deliberate, and deeply significant in one of the world’s most advanced and regulated financial markets. While UPI has already made domestic payments instant and inclusive, Apple Pay introduces a new layer of trust infrastructure for international transactions - combining biometric security, device-level tokenisation, and cross-border card rails to enhance reliability, reduce fraud, and simplify global commerce. This moment isn’t about market entry; it’s about market evolution — where India’s payment story moves: ➡️ from speed to certainty ➡️ from inclusion to interoperability ➡️ from transactions to trust In my latest article, I’ve explored: - Why Apple chose cross-border first, not domestic - How Apple Pay compares with UPI, SWIFT, cards, and wallets - What this means for Indian merchants, fintechs, and regulators - And whether this could become Apple’s first step toward a deeper retail payments play in India 𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒇𝒖𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒑𝒂𝒚𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒔 𝒊𝒔𝒏’𝒕 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒘𝒉𝒐 𝒎𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒔 𝒎𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒚 𝒇𝒂𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒔𝒕 — 𝒊𝒕’𝒔 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒘𝒉𝒐 𝒎𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒂𝒇𝒆𝒔𝒕. Read: “Apple Pay Comes to India’s Cross-Border Payments: The Quiet Rewiring of Trust and Trade.” 👇 #ApplePay #Payments #UPI #Fintech #CrossBorder #DigitalTrust #Innovation #OpenBanking #Leadership #FinancialInclusion #DrRiteshJain India FinTech Forum National Payments Corporation Of India (NPCI) Apple Visa Prasanna Arjun Emerging Payments Association Asia Monica Syed Ronit Sanjiv https://lnkd.in/dfKj8y9Z